Our own Clay Trainor did this clip, and it's in his signature: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whnGgx3huTU&fmt=18

At 7:05 Obama says this:

"I think we can say that the Constitution reflected a enormous blindspot in this culture that carries on until this day and that the framers had that same blindspot. It is an imperfect document, and I think it s a document that reflects some deep flaws."

The_Orlonater

01-21-2009, 07:20 PM

It's not perfect, but better than your utopia Mr. President.

Deborah K

01-23-2009, 07:45 AM

I cannot believe his opinion of the Constitution doesn't bother any one else. Amazing.

Golding

01-23-2009, 07:48 AM

I'm not entirely sure how this is disturbing. The Constitution is an imperfect document, and even its authors knew it. That's the reason they made it amendable.

It's a good document, unquestionably. But perfect? No.

The question is really a matter of what he thinks is the ideal approach for repairing said blindspots. If it's to ignore the Constitution on the basis of its imperfections, then I would agree that this is a disturbing view. If it's to make amendments consistent with the rest of the document, then I think this is the appropriate and intended approach.

PatriotLegion

01-23-2009, 07:56 AM

I cannot believe his opinion of the Constitution doesn't bother any one else. Amazing.

Its the sign of the times. Guess sheeple only see the Constitution as a 230+ year old piece of paper that is useless and don't believe in it.
With MSM and the masses apathy we are in trouble. We are a divided nation for the worst as people still voted on one or two beliefs (ie Demo, Rep, Religion, Color or Sex to name a few) instead of voting for the Country! The masses voted BO because the is for Hope and Change - well this is what we get....

Will the Majority care if the Constitution was radically changed or thrown out probably not (sure they want lose any sleep), but the patriots will sure make a sound, but I'm sure we will be labeled as "Terrorists or Rebels".

Lucille

01-23-2009, 08:19 AM

I cannot believe his opinion of the Constitution doesn't bother any one else. Amazing.

It's been discussed here before. I think he's talking about that Second Bill of Rights (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmRkZjNkNWZlMmUzZDEzZjMxY2Q4NTBjYjJmZDJjMzM=) the evil SOB FDR tried to cook up, which the Dems are still eager to see happen.

Deborah K

01-23-2009, 08:33 AM

I'm not entirely sure how this is disturbing. The Constitution is an imperfect document, and even its authors knew it. That's the reason they made it amendable.

It's a good document, unquestionably. But perfect? No.

The question is really a matter of what he thinks is the ideal approach for repairing said blindspots. If it's to ignore the Constitution on the basis of its imperfections, then I would agree that this is a disturbing view. If it's to make amendments consistent with the rest of the document, then I think this is the appropriate and intended approach.

He's saying the Constitution is deeply flawed. He uses the words "a document that reflects some deep flaws". I've read the Constitution from start to finish. I carry a copy of it in my handbag. I haven't read the Federalist Papers in their entirety but I've read enough to get the gist of why the Constitution was written the way it was. I know about the amendments that some of the founders wanted, that were ulitmately not included - regarding banking institutions, etc.

I know that the Constitution is the framework for the establishment of our government, its laws, and the protections of each individual person who is a citizen. I believe it is the supreme law of the land and should be adhered to and amendments ratified or repealed when agreed upon by the people, instead of what's happening - complete and utter subversion.

It may not be a perfect document, but it is more perfect than anything the world has ever had and thus it has lasted longer than any other document of its kind in history. But it will end up as just a piece of paper and nothing more if the subversion of it continues on. And we will end up losing our individual freedoms. This isn't an overstatement, and I don't get why people aren't concerned about this.

I want to know what Obama means by saying it is a deeply flawed document. This president believes this. What does that mean exactly, and what does he intend to do about?

A. Havnes

01-23-2009, 09:28 AM

It is a flawed document, as no one can write a perfect document, story, essay, etc. However, what really scares me is that this can very well be interpreted as a hint by Obama that he'd like to change it!

acptulsa

01-23-2009, 09:33 AM

Who says it doesn't bother anyone else? When I can't think of anything to say but curse words, I have been known to keep my mouth shut. Not 100% of the time, but I have been known to do it...

Golding

01-23-2009, 10:46 AM

He's saying the Constitution is deeply flawed. He uses the words "a document that reflects some deep flaws". I've read the Constitution from start to finish. I carry a copy of it in my handbag. I haven't read the Federalist Papers in their entirety but I've read enough to get the gist of why the Constitution was written the way it was. I know about the amendments that some of the founders wanted, that were ulitmately not included - regarding banking institutions, etc.

I know that the Constitution is the framework for the establishment of our government, its laws, and the protections of each individual person who is a citizen. I believe it is the supreme law of the land and should be adhered to and amendments ratified or repealed when agreed upon by the people, instead of what's happening - complete and utter subversion.

It may not be a perfect document, but it is more perfect than anything the world has ever had and thus it has lasted longer than any other document of its kind in history. But it will end up as just a piece of paper and nothing more if the subversion of it continues on. And we will end up losing our individual freedoms. This isn't an overstatement, and I don't get why people aren't concerned about this.

I want to know what Obama means by saying it is a deeply flawed document. This president believes this. What does that mean exactly, and what does he intend to do about?He's saying that there are some things about the Constitution that are deeply flawed. The Constitution can have flaws without the document itself being flawed. I think that's where your goof-up is.

The argument that you've read the Constitution and have one with you is sort of a moot point around here. I'd gather that most who frequent this board can say the same thing. You're right that the Constitution should be adhered to, but that doesn't mean that it's pristine. For example, I find the 16th Amendment deeply flawed. I still respect the document as a whole.

Your statement: "It may not be a perfect document, but it is more perfect than anything the world", pretty much sums up my point. It may be "more perfect" than anything else, but it's still not a perfect document. That's why Obama's words that you quoted, taken to their strict meaning, do not disturb me.

LibertyEagle

01-23-2009, 10:57 AM

He's saying that there are some things about the Constitution that are deeply flawed. The Constitution can have flaws without the document itself being flawed. I think that's where your goof-up is.

The argument that you've read the Constitution and have one with you is sort of a moot point around here. I'd gather that most who frequent this board can say the same thing. You're right that the Constitution should be adhered to, but that doesn't mean that it's pristine. For example, I find the 16th Amendment deeply flawed. I still respect the document as a whole.

Your statement: "It may not be a perfect document, but it is more perfect than anything the world", pretty much sums up my point. It may be "more perfect" than anything else, but it's still not a perfect document. That's why Obama's words that you quoted, taken to their strict meaning, do not disturb me.

Yes, but I'll bet you money that Obama isn't talking about amending something that we agree should be to make it more clear.

I'm with Deborah K; I think this is very concerning.

jkr

01-23-2009, 11:57 AM

when saying a document that is the law of the land & our organizational principles is "worthless" he needs to be ALOT more specific about exactly why, have a NATIONAL debate/vote, and then talk of amendment...

ClayTrainor

01-23-2009, 02:25 PM

Hey guys,

here's the clip i used for the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_xNyrzB0xI

Obama is referring to "Racism" and "slavery". i've taken some flak for using this in my video, since some people say that I am "taking his words out of context".

I stand by the position that Slavery and the constitution are irrelevant issues, and the fact that Obama thinks the Constitution is flawed, due to the existence of slavery at the time, is wrong.

The constitution was written to protect the individual rights of each and every citizen and was not written to benefit slavery in ANY WAY.

Slavery was an issue of "time" and "ignorance" not the constitution. It existed in other nations as well, who didn't have the US Constitution.

:cool:

Deborah K

01-23-2009, 02:43 PM

Hey guys,

here's the clip i used for the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_xNyrzB0xI

Obama is referring to "Racism" and "slavery". i've taken some flak for using this in my video, since some people say that I am "taking his words out of context".

I stand by the position that Slavery and the constitution are irrelevant issues, and the fact that Obama thinks the Constitution is flawed, due to the existence of slavery at the time, is wrong.

The constitution was written to protect the individual rights of each and every citizen and was not written to benefit slavery in ANY WAY.

Slavery was an issue of "time" and "ignorance" not the constitution. It existed in other nations as well, who didn't have the US Constitution.

:cool:

Thanks Clay. Having heard it in context, I'm not as concerned.....for now.

Deborah K

01-23-2009, 02:45 PM

The Constitution can have flaws without the document itself being flawed. I think that's where your goof-up is.

Huh? Care to explain that? To my way of thinking, the document IS the Constitution.

Theocrat

01-23-2009, 04:05 PM

http://downloads.wnymathguy.com/Obama08/ObamaConstitution.jpg

Deborah K

01-23-2009, 04:08 PM

http://downloads.wnymathguy.com/Obama08/ObamaConstitution.jpg

Is that a quote from his book? If so, I intend to hold him accountable to that statement.

Theocrat

01-23-2009, 04:12 PM

Is that a quote from his book? If so, I intend to hold him accountable to that statement.

I have no idea.

ClayTrainor

01-23-2009, 04:13 PM

Is that a quote from his book? If so, I intend to hold him accountable to that statement.

Likewise.

I get the feeling, that isn't a quote of Obama's though :rolleyes:. I could be wrong.

heavenlyboy34

01-23-2009, 05:50 PM

OP: he's right, but I fear what his solutions would be :(

Deborah K

01-23-2009, 05:56 PM

OP: he's right, but I fear what his solutions would be :(

In what way is the Constitution deeply flawed? :confused:

Golding

01-24-2009, 06:44 AM

Huh? Care to explain that? To my way of thinking, the document IS the Constitution.I explained it to you in the previous reply. If you care to re-read, I even provided you with an example: I think the 16th Amendment of the Constitution is deeply flawed, however I still believe the document as a whole is good. I'm not saying that's Obama's specific reference, but it's just a point to try to help you comprehend the idea that a criticism of parts of the document is not a criticism of the document as a whole.

Yes, but I'll bet you money that Obama isn't talking about amending something that we agree should be to make it more clear.

I'm with Deborah K; I think this is very concerning.While I think you're right, the thing to remember about smooth-talkers like Obama is that there is always a separation between what they say and what they do. Because of that, I take Obama's words at face value, and then judge him by his actions. If we really want to consider what he's alluding to on an unspoken level, he's unsubtly referring to the Three-Fifths Compromise to try to soften people to the idea that there are things worth changing in the Constitution. The sorts of things he'd be willing to re-write, I agree, are likely disturbing. But at face value, what Obama said is nevertheless true (in fact, he's sort of being Captain Obvious in the statement). The Constitution is an imperfect document that carries some flaws in it. At the very least, he is talking about disagreeing with parts of the Constitution in a Constitutional way -- adjust the imperfections instead of outright ignore the words.